Page images
PDF
EPUB

not be deemed to be income arising or accruing from business or trading operation in the Island.

BARBADOS

The income of companies in Barbados is taxed at the rate of 2 shillings and 6 pence in the pound (10 percent). Companies registered in Barbados are entitled to deduct the tax from dividends paid to shareholders; the amount so deducted is set off against the tax charged on the income (including such dividends) of the shareholders. Every individual is allowed an exemption of £150, and in addition £100 for a wife and £20 for each child provided the annual income does not exceed £500.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][subsumed][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

as amended

GRENADA. The Grenada Income Tax Ordinance of 1923, provides for an exemption limit of £100, and the following rates:

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

Companies are taxed at the rate of 3 shillings in the pound, but life insurance companies pay 1 s. 0 d. on every pound.

ST. LUCIA. The tables of rates for St. Lucia is the same as shown above for Grenada, with the exception that the first £100 of income are taxed at the rate of 4 d. in the pound. In addition all the rates have been increased 12 percent by Law No. 23 of 1934, and increased a further 10 percent by Law No. 1 of 1937. The exemption limit is £100. Companies are charged a flat rate of 2 s. 6 d. in the pound. Mortgage and debenture interest payable to nonresidents is subject to a 5 percent withholding tax.

ST. VINCENT. There is an exemption limit of £50 in St. Vincent. Companies pay a flat rate of 2 s. 6 d. in the pound. The rates payable by individuals are as follows:

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

ANTIGUA.

LEEWARD ISLANDS

Companies are subject to a flat rate of 2 s. 6 d. in the
The rates on individuals are as follows:

pound or 12 percent.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

DOMINICA. The company tax rate is 1 shilling on income not exceeding £1,000 and 3 s. 6 d. on income over £1,000.

The rates on

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

ST. KITTS. NEVIS. The company rates are the same as in the case of Dominica. The rates on individuals range from 2 d. per pound on the first £100 to 3 s. 6 d. or 17.5 percent on all income above £1,500.

MONTSERRAT. The company rates are the same as in Dominica, and rates on individuals the same as in Antigua, with the exception that all income over £1,500 is taxed at 4 s. 6 d. in the pound.

SUGGESTIONS FOR THE IMPROVEMENT

OF COMPARATIVE LAW SERIES ARE ALWAYS WELCOME

[blocks in formation]

The Rome Institute for the Unification of Private Law (under the League of Nations) conducted a survey in 1932, of the commercial arbitration laws of several of the more commercially important countries. Following the publicatior of its report, the institute convoked a committee on arbitration in 1933. This committee composed of the representatives of 5 countries, held 5 sessions from 1934 to 1936, and drafted a proposal of an international law on commercial

arbitration.1

This draft proposal was approved subject to certain amendments by the Ninth Congress of the International Chamber of Commerce, held at Berlin, in 1937. These amendments had as a main object to give precedence, on certain points, to the agreement of the parties, in particular in the event of the latter having referred to special rules.

By a unanimous vote, the Paris Conference, 1936, resolved that the committee be requested to extend an invitation to the various branches of the International Law Association to report on the status of arbitration in various countries and the practicability of unification of the law on this subject. The International Law Association held a conference at Amsterdam in May 1938, and the Commercial Arbitration Committee submitted the following report:

In pursuance of this resolution, your Committee have collected the valuable reports received from various national branches, and they desire to convey to the Chairmen and Secretaries of these branches their thanks for helpful assistance. Your Committee have also derived much assistance from the series of memoranda issued by the International Chamber of Commerce dealing with the laws as to commercial arbitration in a number of important commercial countries.

An examination of these reports and memoranda shows that, apart from the very material departure from legal and arbitral procedure obtaining in some Continental countries with reference to "amiables compositeurs", or the application of the principle of equity as differently understood and applied according to the country in which it is employed, there is really no fundamental difference in the main principles of substantive rules governing commercial arbitration in the leading States. Such main differences as exist relate principally to the rules of evidence and procedure, and to such as affect the qualification of the terms of contract by custom and usage, which vary considerably in the countries concerned. Thus, most Continental States refuse to allow parties to a dispute to be witnesses at all, and the award is principally decided on documentary evidence. Another point which presents serious difficulties is the right of appeal to 1Rapport sus le project d'une Loi Uniforme sur e'arbitrage (U. D. P. 1936 Doc. 24). Commerce Reports, May 1, 1937. Commercial Arbitration

Etudes III

- Special Circular No. 554, Division of Commercial Laws.

The American, Australian and British National Committees did not support the second and third paragraphs. The Japanese National Committee made reservations in respect to these paragraphs.

courts of law, which in some countries appears to be too freely available. Even when the parties have waived their right of appeal in advance, there still exists, in some Continental States, the remedy of "annulment", and also a "claim for revision" which is capable of delaying unduly the enforcement of an award. There is no doubt that such proceedings may result in extreme hardship and are opposed to the general desire of international commerce to obtain a speedy, final and inexpensive determination of disputes by arbitration. The system of "amiables compositeurs", on the other hand, tias always been reviewed with considerable apprehension by Anglo-American countries, as it exempts arbitrators to which it applies (i.e., de facto arbitrators as distinguished from de jure arbitrators) from adhering to the forms and procedure prescribed by ordinary courts of justice, and further empowers them to decide a dispute in their discretion, irrespective of the law applicable to the case.

In view of the divergencies briefly outlined above, it is obviously desirable that greater international uniformity should be established in the practice of commercial arbitration, so as to conform to the standards required by the present exigencies of international commerce, and adopted as the result of experience by great international trading organizations.

Substantial progress towards the realization of such uniformity has been achieved on the American continent with very considerable advantage to commercial interests. The Seventh International Conference of American States, held at Montevideo, in December 1933, adopted the following resolution:

That with a view to establishing even closer relations among the Commercial Associations of the Americas entirely independent of official control, and Inter-American Commercial Agency be appointed in order to represent the commercial interests of all Republics, and to assume, as one of its most important functions, the responsibility of establishing an Inter-American system of arbitration.

Following this important resolution, the Inter-American Commercial Arbitration Commission has formulated and adopted "Arbitration Standards" and also "Standard Rules of Procedure" to govern the proceedings in any American Republic, and for organizing Inter-American Commercial Arbitration Tribunals which will function under such standard rules. It is gratifying to note that this attempt at unification is not confined exclusively to the American continent, as the Fourth Pan-American Commercial Conference, which met at Washington in 1931, resolved that a thorough inquiry should be made by the Pan-American Union as to "the possibilities of the commercial interests of the American Republics joining with the commercial interests of other countries in the support and active use of a system of arbitration." President Roosevelt, on the occasion of the presentation to him of the Medal of the Pan-American Society, commenting on the workmanship it accomplished, remarked:

The relations between nations are, after all, dependent upon the relations between the individuals of those various nations.

In this Commission you are attacking a problem which is fundamental, and the solution of which will be most helpful in promoting the welfare and advance of all the twenty-one Republics of America.

In England, arbitration has gained so prominent a place that it has become an integral part of the commercial, industrial and legal world. Its development during the last fifty years has marked a substantial improvement in its organization, among the chief features of which is the nomination of a single arbitrator by a recognized Association and the establishment of Trade Tribunals of Appeal. The Conference of the Associated Chambers of Commerce of the British Empire, held at Cape Town in October 1927, approved the form of an arbitration clause recommended by the London Court of Arbitration, and which was designed to effect unification and to avoid conflict of laws:

The construction, validity and performance of this contract shall be governed by the law of... and all disputes which may arise under, out of, or in connection with or in relation to this contract shall be submitted to the Arbitration of . . . under and in accordance with (its) Rules at the date hereof.

The parties here to agree that service of any notices in the course of such arbitration at their address as given in this contract shall be valid and sufficient.

Attention should also be directed to the notable efforts of the International Chamber of Commerce for the unification of the law of arbitration and the enforcement of arbitral awards. At its recent Congress (Berlin, 1937) a resolution was passed approving, subject to important amendments, the draft of an international law of arbitration prepared by the International Institute of Rome (S.D.N.~~ U.D.P., 1936, Etudes 111, Arbitrage Doc. 23). This draft recognizes the system of amiables compositeurs, and also differs materially in other respects from the Anglo-American system of arbitration, and it is therefore not surprising that it was expressly dissented from by the British, Australian and American Delegations. The Japanese Delegation also withheld its approval. It is understood that the final revision of the amendments passed at the Berlin Conference has not yet been published.

There is great diversity of law and practice in regard to arbitration at present prevailing in the various commercial countries. If the Governments of those countries could be induced to approve a uniform arbitration procedure in a form which would be internationally acceptable to all countries, that would very materially assist international commercial arbitration. The International Chamber of Commerce and the Rome Institute are undoubtedly right in laying great importance upon the desirability of a uniform arbitration law.

But the draft law prepared by the Rome Institute does not appear to your Committee likely, unless substantially amended, to gain the approval of commercial countries such as Great Britain, or the British Dominions, or the United States of America. It proceeds too much upon the conception of arbitration as it exists in some codes of law on the Continent of Europe, and does not sufficiently recognize the different conception in Great Britain, the British Dominions and the United States of America. The type of uniform national arbitration law which is wanted, and which, it may be, will ultimately be adopted and passed by all commercial countries (through that, it must be recognized, will involve protracted negotiations), is one which will

1. Permit and enforce, where such has been agreed upon by the parties to commercial contracts, independent and impartial arbitration

« PreviousContinue »